According to senior F.B.I. officials, Mr. Comey felt that he would be breaking his pledge of transparency to Congress if he did not reveal the new information from the Weiner case. And he believed that the bureau would be accused of suppressing details to benefit Mrs. Clinton — an accusation that he believed could do lasting damage to the F.B.I.’s credibility.

As it stands, we now have real-time, raw-take transparency taken to its illogical limit, a kind of reality TV of federal criminal investigation. Perhaps worst of all, it is happening on the eve of a presidential election. It is antithetical to the interests of justice, putting a thumb on the scale of this election and damaging our democracy.

You know what is the scariest and most absurd part of Comey’s offered reasons? That he was afraid he would be accused of a cover-up.

Please understand, he’s saying one of two things: Either he himself thinks that not releasing raw information learned through a search warrant, the significance of which his agency does not yet know because it needs a new search warrant to learn more, amounts to a cover-up. Or he himself knows it does not, but is so cowed by the prospect that some political forces will erroneously call it that, that he releases raw information learned through a search warrant.

That alone should cause Obama to fire him. Does Comey also think it’s a cover-up to withhold from the public information learned through grand jury testimony? Does he think that OTHER law enforcement agencies should announce to the public raw information learned through a search warrant?

And does this definition of cover-up apply only just before an election, to information about a candidate? He did say, after all–stunningly; this IS the FBI director, remember–that his very purpose was to “inform” the public about new, utterly raw information about a candidate (for president, no less) obtained through law enforcement policy powers.

Where exactly does he think this use of police investigatory power ends?

I think Obama needs to make clear that it ends well before where Comey has now said it ends. And he needs to do that NOW, not after the election.

Something about informing the public before the election. As Comey himself would say.

In this instance, though, it would be about informing both the public and law enforcement and prosecutors’ offices around the country that, the FBI director’s statement and actions notwithstanding, the law does forbid the use of raw investigatory information obtained through search warrants, grand jury testimony and other means, with the exception of information contained in police reports and in indictments and other court papers available to the public.

Comey has seven years remaining on his 10-year term, but the president can fire him for cause. Anyone who thinks that statement of his does not constitute cause does not understand the significance of what Comey actually said.

Obama rarely explains things; that’s been a huge problem throughout his presidency and is a large part of the reason for the Democrats’ massive midterm electoral losses, in 2010 and 2014. But this should not be hard to explain, because it’s just not very complicated. He can quote this:

Actually, the idea that materials gathered in a governmental investigation resolved without prosecution should, in the name of transparency, be made known in summary form when relevant for the guidance of voters is quite frightening.

Donald B. Ayer, the post states under his byline, served as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of California, principal deputy solicitor general and deputy attorney general under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Comey does not understand the fundamental nature of police and prosecutorial investigatory powers, either in and of itself or in that public misunderstandings of it should itself alter fundamental nature of police and prosecutorial investigatory powers. He has misinformed the public, police and prosecutors about this. This misinformation should not be allowed to stand.

It doesn’t matter whether the misinformation is because Comey is dismayingly weak or instead just stupidyingly stupid. We need him gone, and his instruction on police and prosecutorial informational obligations corrected. This is profoundly serious stuff.

Really.

____

* UPDATED: Reader J.Goowin posted this in the Comments thread:

J.Goodwin

October 31, 2016 10:48 am

President Obama probably should not fire the director of the FBI for cause just before the election in reaction to the director’s apparent political efforts. Even asking for his resignation before the election is probably a bad political move.

He’ll certainly be packing up his desk the day after the election though.

Upon reconsideration, I agree that given how very close we are to the election, Obama should just wait until afterward to fire Comey. But for the reasons I discussed in this post, Obama should fire him shortly after the election, and explain exactly why.

This post’s title originally was: WHY OBAMA SHOULD FIRE COMEY, NOW. It no longer says “Now.”

Comments (24)

J.Goodwin

October 31, 2016 10:48 am

President Obama probably should not fire the director of the FBI for cause just before the election in reaction to the director’s apparent political efforts. Even asking for his resignation before the election is probably a bad political move.

He’ll certainly be packing up his desk the day after the election though.

EMichael

October 31, 2016 11:10 am

I agree with JG about the timing of the firing.

But there is another part of this that shows his inability to do this job.

You telling me that he had agents find these things weeks ago and not inform him until this past Thursday? Seriously?

My post links to a Washington Post blog post on the Fourth Amendment issue, from yesterday.

Beverly Mann

October 31, 2016 1:30 pm

In other words, the agents who’d declined or failed to request a search warrant may not be the incompetent players on this. If you get my drift.

coberly

October 31, 2016 12:00 pm

well, i’ll add to the chorus

firing Comey now would smell like cover up. the only thing to do is explain to people (something Obama does not do) what is wrong with what Comey did, and wait for the results of investigating the emails… accelerate that investigation.

but don’t expect the people to believe anything they don’t want to believe, or not believe anything they want to believe.

I agree no firing before the election, but indeed a point I made in an earlier post about the psychological importance of the final two weeks means indeed that Comey has maxxed the negative impact on Hillary, when he could have issued this thing several weeks ago. When I put my comment up on that, I assumed as was then thought that he had just learned of it the day before.

BTW, it may be over the top, but Harry Reid is now claiming that Comey is covering up evidence of the links between the Russians and Trump. If that is the case, then we have clear and blatant partisan tilting on what gets reported just prior to a presidential election and what does not.

Beverly Mann

October 31, 2016 1:39 pm

I don’t think Reid is over-the-top at all. Comey, incredibly, admitted to a political motive for his public letter after learning of the information only a day earlier, and without knowing of the contents or nature of the emails.

That the FBI director would outright admit to political motive for releasing raw unspecific information obtained through a search warrant does constitute an admission of a Hatch Act violation, in my opinion.

But the REAL significance of Reid’s letter, I think, is that it illustrates where this could go if Comey is correct that withholding information obtained through a law enforcement investigation in a politically sensitive matter during an election season constitutes–of all things–a COVER-UP.

THAT point is what the Reid letter should be used to make. As well as that, by Comey’s own standards, he’s engaging in … a cover-up.

Jack

October 31, 2016 1:05 pm

“….-— an accusation that he believed could do lasting damage to the F.B.I.’s credibility.”

What credibility would that be? Thee FBI’s credibility, what there may be of it, rests almost totally on the shoulders of Hollywood’s image of that organization as presented in its movies for many years. Since the days of J. Edgar Hoover the FBI was often disclosed to be a step behind most significant criminal activities in the United States. The Mafia thrived under FBI blundering as its agents went around chasing pinkos, commies, and black protesters. Even the investigation of the murders of the three Mississippi civil rights activists had to be pushed on Hoover by LBJ and Robert Kennedy. Though that investigation was finally brought to a fruitful conclusion, it is an exception in FBI history. What investigatory acumen has the FBI demonstrated in recent history?

Jack

October 31, 2016 1:12 pm

And I was much delighted to see that Harry Reid has finally shown some aggressive action in this Presidential campaign. The open letter to Comey leaves little room further cover up of the FBI’s, or is it just Comey, peculiar partisan actions.

BTW, what content could be so significant as to justify yet additional trolling through the emails. It’s become clear lately that past Administration executives have done much the same using of non government servers for emailing material not meant for general publication.

Bev,
Just for the record, in your reply to me you repeated the false claim that Comey only learned of this stuff the day before he issued his letter. This is known now to be false; he had known of it for weeks.

Beverly Mann

October 31, 2016 4:21 pm

No, the FBI agents handling the Weiner case in NYC knew of this weeks ago. Comey was told of it only last Thursday.

bronco

October 31, 2016 4:40 pm

Comey is Obamas ticket out of the Clintonville sewer . He can use Comey to cut all ties to these lunatics and then say oh well my hands are tied . This is actually brilliant , probably the best news Obama has heard in months.

The White House says it will remain neutral regarding the reopening of an investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server, after the discovery of more emails that FBI Director James Comey said may be relevant. After a letter from Comey to Congress on Friday, which stated that new emails found on a laptop used by Clinton aide Huma Abedin “appear to be pertinent to our investigation,” members of both parties have criticized the timing of the move.Today the White House declined to state an opinion on Comey’s action.”I’ll neither defend nor criticize what Director Comey has decided to communicate to the public about this investigation,”
He also said that President Barack Obama doesn’t think Comey is trying to sway the presidential race.”The president doesn’t believe that Director Comey is intentionally trying to influence the outcome of an election,” he said. “The president doesn’t believe that he’s secretly strategizing to benefit one candidate or one political party.”
Earnest said Obama maintains a high opinion of Comey and has confidence in his ability to do his job. “Director Comey is a man of integrity, he’s a man of principle, and he’s a man of good character,”

coberly

October 31, 2016 11:40 pm

well, one could hope that Obama is being smart and letting others make the case against Comey.

or maybe he was brought up to believe that “if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.”

bkrasting

October 31, 2016 11:48 pm

Bev – There are some who disagree with you. Maybe you should consider the source??

“President Obama doesn’t think Comey tried to influence the election.

“Obama still believes Comey has “good character”

From John Earnest today……

Warren

November 1, 2016 10:05 am

I’m a little confused here. What, exactly, did Director Comey do that should get him fired?

coberly

November 1, 2016 10:38 am

Warren

you are always a little confused. Read the damn post and if you can’t figure it out from there there is no reason for any of us to waste our time trying to explain it to someone who is pretending he can’t understand just for the attention it gets him.

Hint: Hatch act.

Hint 2: google it and see what and who says he did bad.

J.Goodwin

November 1, 2016 11:36 am

Re: Bkrasting

In sports there is something that fans often call “the dreaded vote of confidence” that often is a quick precursor to the coach or manager being fired. Sometimes the “vote of confidence” is really a shot across the bow, it tells the public that ownership is aware of the situation, and is monitoring it, and also serves to reinforce to the person at risk (even if their culpability was minimal) that they need to figure out a way to deal with the issue or they’re going over the rail next.

William Ryan

November 1, 2016 2:22 pm

As I have already stated before nobody is going to get fired as Comey should have recommended to the DOJ previously that HRC should had gotten a special prosecutor appointed to the case but Obama and Lynch did not do their jobs. They both should be the ones fired if anybody. Comey did not attempt to sway the election by giving Congess notification a the huge e-mail stash. They cannot prove there was any intent to do so. The DNC is attempting to scapegoat Comey as HRC has done to many others… As for a better view and update on the rest of the HRC most current scandal go read todays WallStreetonParade.com from Pam Martens and I’m sure you will gain a much better perspective ,view and opinions…